To the West! Over the corpse of White Poland lies the road to world-wide conflagration. March on Vilno, Minsk, Warsaw! -Mikhail Tukhachevsky, Bolshevik Commander of the Western Front.

Hello everyone. To say the least, I'm not particularly well experienced or versed in this game at all (in fact, I do not even have it at all, though I intend to get it when sales roll around). However, I am an old Slitherine and Matrix hand as well as a history nerd. I've gotten plenty of experience from the Panzer Corps game that this engine is based on. And this concept is one idea that came to mind which it seemed that Commander:TGW would be superbly placed to model. . One of History's greatest unwritten conflicts, and perhaps a great "What If" in the modern world. So I figured I would push this out here to both clear a brain fart, and to do a rough "probability check" for those of it.

The basic concept is a post-WWI period, focusing on the conflict between the burgeoning Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and its' enemies over the attempt by Lenin to export it globally, but also accounting for the various emerging nations and factions as well as their conflicts.. With some doses of Alt History (to account for the Bolsheviks doing better than they did historically)

The Storyline: Simple enough, and almost a half-sequel or "expansion pack" to the main game. The year is 1918, and the world stands weary of the war that has just finished. The First World War that brought millions of deaths, trauma for those as far afield as China and the Congo, the ruin of entire regions and peoples, and simmering (or not so simmering) discontent at the costs and meaning of it all has finally ended. With advances all along the Western Fronts finally cracking the Central Powers, it now seems like there will be a return to peace as the various major powers prepare to hammer out the peace and demobilize their vast armed forces and war industries. After all, who could imagine or want- after witnessing the carnage of the one that ended just months ago- yet another war like this one?

Yet this optimism is unfounded. For unbeknownst to many, there is already such men in power. And for them, the slaughter that began in 1914 was merely a prelude to an even greater, vaster conflict. One that will overturn every society yet built.

For Russia, the world war ended a year earlier, in 1917. The year when the Tsar collapsed, a Parliamentary Republic meant to replace him collapsed, and the former realms of the Romanov collapsed into a flurry of revolution, secession, occupation, serial coups, and bloodshed. Now, the Bolsheviks stand in command of the two pillars of the former empire in Petrograd and Moscow, having inaugurated the first Communist government to have national power. But Communism is not defined by nations or national boundaries; it is an ideology for the world. And Vladimir Lenin and his compatriots intend to bring it to the world.

Having withstood the first few stern tests of their "White" opponents, the Bolsheviks now command millions of fighters and workers in the heartland of the old Russian Empire, the sympathies of millions of people in and outside Nicholas II's former realm, and the attention of the world. In turn the Politburo is now starting to feel confident enough to not merely look West but march and plan West. To command an army of Workers and Peasants animated by the ideals of Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels into the ancestral home of both. While in Budapest, the nascent Social Democracy is being undermined by a well organized and armed Bolshevik party under Bela Kun, who are recruiting heavily from both ultra-nationalists and Social Democrats. It seems like only a matter of time that the Republican government will crack and hand the reins of power to the Communists.... or be overthrown. While in Germany, a Republic has been declared that is beset by threats from both its' military and the Far Left. While the Spartakists are by and large not Bolshevik themselves, they are armed and occasionally fighting the government and Reichswehr in the streets, and more inclined to see Bolshevik troops as preferable to republican or imperial ones. And furthermore, in Turkey, Spain, Ireland, and the colonies dissent and anger brew.

To Lenin, the time is now. He believes that if he can lead an army to assist his ideological comrades in gaining or maintaining power and plant the red flag in Germany, it will send up a lightning rod that will signal to the people of the world that the ages of capitalism, feudalism, and monarchism is over. That the future is now, and the only thing the people have to lose in this experiment are their chains. And there is little in the way of organized resistance to stop him.

The Whites are battered and bloodied in a way that is hard to recover from. The Bolsheviks' former sponsors in the Central Powers have been defeated and are in no shape to dominate the Eastern Front like they did. And the tide of revolution has caught the Western Allies just as they intended to demob and wind down from the conflicts, with only a relatively few forces to stand in the face of Lenin's fighters.

What remains is a hodge-podge of local powers, some reemerging from the war like Romania, and others clawing their way to independence either for the first time (like Estonia or Finland) or after centuries of history, like Poland. They are the second and third tier nations of Europe, less numerous, less developed, and less well armed than the great giants of the era. And yet at this crucial moment, it seems like they now stand at the forefront of history. And whether those supporting the Allies or those supporting the Bolsheviks prevail in those nations may yet determine the fate of all....

The Sides: Vanilla features two hard coded alliances, and this one would be no different. And by and large, they are more similar to the originals than one might think.

However, the "Central Powers" would be replaced with an alliance of Communist powers (and possible pro-Soviet/anti-Allied groups like the Turkish nationalists under Kemal, who received some support from the Soviets even though they were not communists, and who fought alongside them). Their goal- or at least Lenin's- is fairly simple. To spread the flames of revolution to the West, meaning matters like neutrality and the like are mostly trivialities and the prospect for diplomacy is much less. In this endeavor they lack much of the quality, sophistication, and the like of the Allied armies, but they easily have numbers, maneuverability, and the prospect of capitalizing on dissent, sabotage, spying, and the like. As well as the possibility of having pro-Communist units spawn after capturing a city or other important location. And the possibility of strikes there leading to revolts elsewhere (for instance, advances in Central Europe leading to revolts in Germany and Catalonia, while a Communist Europe helps spawn Communist revolts in North America...).

In contrast, the Entente Allies would remain more or less as they were, expanding to include a few new independent nations like Poland, Estonia, etc. The main Western Allies will be all but unstoppable in a conventional fight, but will have lower Morale than average due to the desire of the public to avoid another war, and heavy incentives for the main Western Allies (France, Britain, Belgium, Italy, US) to demobilize their troops in someway or face morale penalties. In contrast, their more up and coming allies like Romania, Poland, and the Baltics are not so hampered and can wage total war, but face the dire fact that they are underdeveloped, underteched, and the like. And yet they are the first line of defense against it.

Anyway, what do you guys think? Does this sound like something that could be workable?

Anyway, what do you guys think? Does this sound like something that could be workable?

Unfortunately not, CTGW only allows to mod the existing nations of 1914-1918, you can't create genuine "new" nations like Yugoslavia or Lithunia because the original owner status of a hex can't be changed.

You can only create "puppet" states on hexes captured from one of the original factions, for example a Congress Poland consisting of hexes that are "technically" still owned by Germany, AH and Russia and will cause all kinds of problems like having no original capital and other stuff. The original designers failed to deliver the promised map editor, so there is no way to address this obstacle as the mapfiles are encyrpted and can't be edited.

If you can live with the fact that any hexes of such a newly created nation will instantly revert back to its original owner after a surrender your idea is indeed feasible. All you'd need to have is new flags for the new nations, pictures for commanders and events and some 20.000 lines of new code. Assuming you have some knowledge of LUA-scripting this project would take you about half a year if you show perseverance.

"Potzblitz! Donnerwetter!" (Emperor Wilhelm II)

Commander the Great War on steroids: POTZBLITZ mod!http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=218&t=77884&p=662610#p662610

In this case I was imagining that Yugoslavia would at least be relatively easy. Basically, in cases like Yugoslavia or the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (yeah slightly anachronistic name but farq it if I'm going to pretend that each and every one of the SSRs in the former Russian Empire were independent) would be fairly easy. They would quite logically be Russia and Serbia code wise, only with some of the flags and references being changed so that you have the appropriate red flag and nation text pop up for Lenin's guys while the right pan-Slavic tricolor pop up for the Yugos even if on a code level it still reads something like "Russia = The Soviet Union" and "Serbia = Yugoslavia."

Completely new nations like Lithuania, Poland, and whatnot are harder nuts for me to ponder though.

Robotron wrote: because the original owner status of a hex can't be changed.

Interesting. I'm not quite sure what you mean by this; can you explain more?

Robotron wrote:You can only create "puppet" states on hexes captured from one of the original factions, for example a Congress Poland consisting of hexes that are "technically" still owned by Germany, AH and Russia and will cause all kinds of problems like having no original capital and other stuff. The original designers failed to deliver the promised map editor, so there is no way to address this obstacle as the mapfiles are encyrpted and can't be edited.

Ah damn, gotta love broken promises. Thanks for the clarification, and yeah I imagine that would a royal Pita to deal with.

However, perhaps it could turn out to be some kind of advantage, in some ways? After all, I think one of the key points in the mod and its' strategy is that the newly independent nations in Eastern Europe ARE incredibly fragile (like they were historically) and lacked the kind of deep rooted foreign acceptance that even nations like Romania had. So perhaps it would make sense if they suffer from problems organizing their state in a way that having London or Paris or Berlin saves Britain/France/Germany from, and a Soviet march flattening them just renders them extinct......

Still, doesn't mean it isn't a problem.

Robotron wrote:If you can live with the fact that any hexes of such a newly created nation will instantly revert back to its original owner after a surrender

Interesting, but since I don't quite understand it due to lacking your immense modding understanding and personal experience with the game, may I "bracket" what you're saying to try and get a clue how this would manifest?

To use the great Hungary Clustereff as an example, would this mean that...

A: The Allies defeating the Turks (who are presumably a fairly vanilla or lightly modded version of the Ottomans) in the War of Independence leads to their Yugoslav and Romanian allies losing control of the Croatian and Transylvanian territories they held, while Czechoslovakia fades out of existence?

B: Soviet Hungary defeating Czechoslovakia would result in it gaining back (due to it being a renamed Austria-Hungary) the realms of the Dual Monarchy in their entirety?

C: Soviet Hungary defeating Yugoslavia results in it regaining control of the territory the Yugoslavs held that is owned by its' predecessor the Austro-Hungarians?

Which scenarios fits?

Robotron wrote: your idea is indeed feasible.

Interesting, and that's what I was mostly lookign for. So it seems like the main hobble would be trying to add in the newly independent post-Brest Litovsk nations that are not represented in the vanilla game (like Poland, Estonia/Latvia, Armenia, and so on). So perhaps a more logical starting point would be a sort of alternate history "apocalypse scenario"?

One where the Bolsheviks have broken through the Polish defense at Warsaw and overcome the resistance of the other post-Brest nations to actually reach Germany, leading to them sparking a civil war between the "revolutionaries" and their enemies, and leaving the main Allied nations from the War (like Britain/France/Belgium/Italy/Greece/America) as their main adversaries? I imagine in this case the rules demanding the main Allied nations draw down their troop strength would be reduced or even thrown out the window altogether, given that the Allies are now clearly facing another Great War.

That might leave the situation with something closer to Vanilla. A scenario where the Vanilla Entente nations are fighting the big red blob and its' constituent members like they do in vanilla, only the Big Red Blob's native habitat is in the East rather than Central, and it represents the opposite side of the political spectrum. From there it could be considered how this would be changed.

Robotron wrote:All you'd need to have is new flags for the new nations, pictures for commanders and events and some 20.000 lines of new code.

Well, for what it's worth the new flags strike me as *relatively* easy, since the main idea I had was picking a vanilla nation for each mod nation to replace/assume. For instance, USSR would be made using Russia's place. And so it would be a matter of finding an appropriate flag (from either the USSR or Russian SFSR) for it and slapping it in the "Russia_Flag" ones. Now, I'm going to go out on a limb here and imagine that the game doesn't just conveniently have Bolshevik flags lying in the database so that would still require some work for someone to put an appropriate USSR flag into the right format for it to be put in Russia's niche. But it gives me an idea of how to work.

Commanders would be a bigger issue. I'm not sure how flexible commanders are. Whether or not you can just pile more in on top of the preexisting ones or whether you'd need to replace them with one of their own, and I would appreciate some advice regarding that. However, if it turns out there is a limited number of commander slots like there are for nations, I imagine it would just be convenient to put in the new ones (especially important for the Communist side) in the slots of officers who are either dead (like say the Red Baron) who would otherwise have no business being in service (like Conrad or basically every single CP Naval leader). That would free their slots up to be replaced with different commanders.

Also helps that some could be reused. The Entente side and the Turks are particularly good examples of this. I still imagine it would be a royal freaking Pita to deal with everything though.

From what I understand of the game second hand, it seems like there are not that many events in the vanilla game. I suppose that means I could get away with people not expecting a thousand a half ones, so I can focus on what I figure are the most important/crucial for the period and scenarios (though those would still be massively important). I do have some ideas for events and mechanics as it is, but I figure that I'd want to play vanilla first to get a feel for it.

I get the feeling that it can be done though. It is just going to be a pain.

Robotron wrote:Assuming you have some knowledge of LUA-scripting this project would take you about half a year if you show perseverance.

I can imagine. I'll confess that I do not have that knowledge. However, I have done some light modding (like quick events, edits to them, and scenario edits). Woefully inadequate to be sure, but not nothing.

As it stands now, I was mostly fishing the idea out here to see if it would even be plausible to twist the game and its' engine in a way to make this scenario even slightly possible. To see if there weren't some kind of hard coded issues like-say- a some nations having to be on a given alliance or given start dates. I'm pleased to see that judging from your response, that isn't the case.

I figure the mod would have a stronger focus on land combat and politics/diplomacy. With muuuch less of a focus on naval combat (unsurprisingly, since the_Western Allies have nearly exclusive control of the major naval units and the only real Communist ones are hemmed in in the Eastern Baltic, meaning that the Entente doesn't have that much to fear unless Communists seize control of the German fleet or some Allied naval units in mutiny events), and slightly less so on the air. Fewer units on the ground, less entrenchment, and much more maneuverability. Meaning that games should probably go faster and the margin for error is that much less. Again, I don't have firsthand experience with how the game handles, but I do have a couple rough ideas on how to get the balance into more of what fits (starting with fewer units overall, and a different demography for them overall, like more cavalry and intermediate infantry units with fewer AFVs).

Though I imagine I am unequipped to pursue the matter that much further until I get the game, or someone else is interested enough to make this their own. I do have some ideas for potential "Scenarios", in keeping with the various campaign options the vanilla game offers.

Every non-water hex has a hard-coded original owner for each scenario whose flag will be shown in the lower right of the hex terrain picture. This original owner can not be changed (non-editable mapfile) but you can change the current owner. Thing is: the moment the current owner surrenders, every hex not occupied by troops will switch back to its original owner, so for example you would see parts of a neutral AH re-appear the moment Hungary surrenders. Also you would see AHs flag all the time in the lower right corner of every hex owned by newly created nations, in this case Hungary which will be created out of hexes originally owned by AH. This is irritating to say the least.

Commanders: In fact modding commanders is a breeze compared to other stuff (events, new nations). You can add or remove as many commanders as you like. Every commander requires three pictures in varying sizes for display purposes. There are blank pictures to be found in the data/graphics/commanders folder to experiment with. The corresponding file is commanders.lua.

Flags:Like with commanders several sizes for each flag must be provided for different display purposes as well as unit roundels. Take a look into data/graphics/flags to get a glimpse of how many (quite a lot) are required for every new nation.

Units:Modding units is even easier than commanders IF you are willing to use what is provided. Creating new kinds of unit types will require you to create unit graphics from scratch which is a quite a chore if you are not skilled at pixeling. The corresponding file is units.lua.

Techs:Modding techs is comparable to units: new stuff needs new graphic first, modding the stats is no problem at all. The corresponding file is technology.lua.

Nations:This is a diligent but routine piece of work for you have to make sure to edit half a dozen scripts for every new nation.

Events:Standard events require a 414x348 picture in .png24 format. And are reasonable easy to mod if you just want to have some picture displayed for flavour reasons (like the 1914 Christmas Truce event). If you want to include events with several possible outcomes or trigger events at variable dates things get more techy. Which brings me to:

Learning LUA scripting:The web is full of beginner-level instructions concerning this and if you have at least a rough understanding of basic stuff like dealing with variables, arrays and logical operators you should be able to come up with some results.Look into the game.events.lua file to get an idea of how the functions are structured. For example the function for the Christmas Truce event,the most simple event of all:

1. function ChristmasTruce() ---this means: The name of the function is ChristmasTruce. The function starts here. 2. if GetEvent("ChristmasTruce") == 0 then ---this means: This function will be checked IF the ChristmasTruce has not yet happened (== 0).3. if game.turn == 14 then --- this means: IF it's turn #14 in the game perform the following:4. SetEvent("ChristmasTruce", game.turn) --- this means: trigger the event "ChristmasTruce" (this will display the picture and the text). The event then will count as "has happened" and won't be checked again.5. end --- this means: END closes the gameturn-check in line #36. end --- this means: END closes the "has happened yet" check in line #27. end --- this means: END closes the ChristmasTruce function in line #1

Hope all this make some sense.Wow, it's late here. See ya!

"Potzblitz! Donnerwetter!" (Emperor Wilhelm II)

Commander the Great War on steroids: POTZBLITZ mod!http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=218&t=77884&p=662610#p662610

Interesting ideas. There was a mod announced a while back that was based on the historical Russian Civil War, but it apparently was abandoned. That would have been tricky given the hard-coded alliances, and Bolsheviks versus the world would have been closest to the mark (the Whites, Cossacks, nationalists (Poles, Ukrainians, etc.), Germans, and Entente interventionists were far from allies but never really fought each other).

In my view, the most plausible scenario for Soviet Russia to be in a position to export revolution would have been if Germany had not demanded so much territory in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. Berlin tried to seize so much territory that they had to keep roughly half of their Eastern Front divisions in place rather than concentrating every available man for the crucial final offensive in France. It is not too implausible that Germany would have offered an armistice "in place" and that Lenin might have been able to impose his will to accept the German peace terms sooner (when the reality was that Trotsky's initial decision to walk away from negotiations meant the Germans were ultimately able to impose even more draconian terms). Naturally, both the German General Staff and the Bolsheviks believe that the peace is temporary and that the other is destined to collapse. The Bolshevik Red Guards had seized power in Kiev and much of the Ukraine in the winter of 1917-1918 and were only expelled by the arrival of the Germans. This in turn facilitated the Cossacks being able to hold or retake the Don River basin, which is where the principal "White" force, the Russian Volunteer Army, was able to rally. The civil war in south Russia might have been more or less over before it began without German intervention. The same is true for the Baltics. The Red Army, the Latvian Riflemen, and local Red Guards easily took control of the region as the German Army withdrew at the end of 1918, but the Entente actually compelled the Germans to stop the demobilization of the Eastern Front armies in order to prevent the spread of Bolshevism. Some of those German soldiers later opted to stay on and fight as Freikorps in alliance with various White and nationalist forces (incidentally this is where much of the Nazi ideology about driving out the Bolshevik subhumans and colonizing the East had its origins).

If the Germans transfer even more forces to the West than they did historically, then the Entente might have been harder pressed than they were in 1918 and German morale may not have collapsed so suddenly. If Bolshevik power had seemed more secure in 1918, the Entente likely would not have gone through with its far-fetched attempts to restore a pro-war regime and would instead have put more effort into enticing Lenin's government to re-enter the war (this was actually considered at the time, as well). Under these conditions, the Entente evacuates the Czech Legion for service in France rather than using it to secure a foothold in Siberia and never occupies Vladivostok or Arkhangelsk. Perhaps London and Paris would have offered to forgive tsarist-era debts and to recognize the Soviet republic's right to claim all previous territory of the Russian Empire if they re-entered the war, giving the Bolsheviks an additional pretext (even if they wait until after the armistice, which they were never a party to, to initiate hostilities).

There's a few other wild cards that could be thrown in there, too. Many of the future White generals had actually been arrested by the Provisional Government as a result of the attempted Kornilov coup in September 1917, but were freed by sympathetic officers to prevent them from falling into Bolshevik hands. If they stay imprisoned or are killed, there would be even less organized resistance to the Reds. The humiliating terms of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was the most significant factor in causing many of the radical socialists and anarchists who were initially allied with (or at least not actively opposed to) the Bolsheviks to turn against them, which in turn led to the assassination attempt on Lenin, the intensification of Red Terror, etc. Likewise, if the Russian Civil War had ended sooner the Bolsheviks would not have had to resort to the policies of "war communism" which alienated many of their initial supporters and provoked a peasant revolt (getting rid of the various "Green" and "Black" movements which would be near impossible to simulate with this engine). Finally, General Brusilov eventually offered his service to the Bolsheviks in May 1920 and persuaded many Russian officers to put aside their political feelings and unite around the new government for the sake of national unity. He made his decision largely as a result of the Polish advances in the Ukraine and his beliefs that the White movement was too reliant on foreign assistance and their goals of restoring the propertied classes was too violently opposed by the majority of the population. Under different circumstances, he might have made this choice in 1918 instead.

Tl;dr, I think the only way this scenario is plausible is if Soviet Russia was in much better shape (and the rest of Europe was in worse shape) than was historically the case. Having the Germans move even more of their forces to the Western Front in 1918 accomplishes this, as it also makes it less likely for the Entente to divert any forces for intervention in Russia. The Russian Civil War would be far more brief and less destructive (which also means that the appeal of communism in Europe would not have been as damaged by the back and forth atrocities of that conflict). This also helps solve the problem of trying to add new countries, as the Reds were able to brush aside the weak local nationalist movements in Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia, etc. until the German Army drove them out.

Apologies for the delay everyone, have been sick for the last couple days. In all due honesty I still am, but I figure I might as well.

@Robotron

Thank you kindly for your reply, it is enlightening.

Robotron wrote:Original hex ownership:

Every non-water hex has a hard-coded original owner for each scenario whose flag will be shown in the lower right of the hex terrain picture. This original owner can not be changed (non-editable mapfile) but you can change the current owner. Thing is: the moment the current owner surrenders, every hex not occupied by troops will switch back to its original owner, so for example you would see parts of a neutral AH re-appear the moment Hungary surrenders.

Well, that's unfortunate. And damn unpleasant. However, if it can't be worked around, it can't be worked around. However, I do have a question on that, especially since "Hungary" in this mod would probably be using the A-H tag, with territory where the Allies are mostly

A: When Hungary surrenders, would that mean it recovers all the territory not occupied by the Allies in the entire former empire- even those otherwise occupied currently- reverts to the Hungarians, even places like, say, Vienna?

B: Would it mean that the territory in the rump Hungarian state outside of those held by occupying troops would revert there, without necessarily disrupting the rest?

and

C: If you moved the troops out afterwards, would it mean the territory they were holding goes back?

Robotron wrote:Also you would see AHs flag all the time in the lower right corner of every hex owned by newly created nations, in this case Hungary which will be created out of hexes originally owned by AH. This is irritating to say the least.

I can imagine, though since the route I would consider would be A-H using the Hungary tag, I am not sure it would apply to that specifically. But I imagine the former German and Russian Empires are going to be a mess...

Though that said, the vanilla flag of their pre war owner might be helpful in some ways; given how this was still very much an era after the fall of the great Absolutist Empires shattering what came before but before the formal peaces at Versailles etc. al. hammering out what came after on an official basis, I imagine they could serve as helpful reminders. After all, the pre war world is the canvas that this is being adjusted from.

In addition, it might help do something I would hope to, by highlight the fragility of the newly independent states of Europe in the face of such a threat. Though still, I don't know the finer details.

I guess in this case, it might be easiest to start with a sort of "Apocalypse hypothetical" scenario, where the Bolsheviks have broken through Warsaw's defenses and overrun most of the new nations (while threatening to do the same to Romania) and Soviets with their paramilitaries have started to pop up (again?) in Germany and elsewhere. Leading the Western Allies proper to have to fight back a spirited invasion of Central/Western Europe proper without having to rely on their allies.

I imagine it would play far more similarly to vanilla Commander than the other starts, and given how I imagine the penalties for draw downs would be massively reduced or removed in light of the great threat, it would mean it could get hammered out without having to worry about at least a couple of the scripts and events that would be important for the "proper" scenarios.

Robotron wrote:Commanders: In fact modding commanders is a breeze compared to other stuff (events, new nations). You can add or remove as many commanders as you like. Every commander requires three pictures in varying sizes for display purposes. There are blank pictures to be found in the data/graphics/commanders folder to experiment with. The corresponding file is commanders.lua.

Indeed? well, good to know. Though I imagine the work itself will be a pita.

Part of the reason I figured it would be simpler/better to use the pre-existing Central Powers is not just their pre existing color scheme (red, right down to the red stars of the commanders...), but also because it would simplify the editing to some degree. For instance, I imagine that most of the officers of the Turkish Nationalists Kemal led would already be present in the Vanilla Turkish OOB. So I can just use them.

A bigger issue is dealing with Russian officers, especially those who went over to the Bolsheviks (of which there were many), since that might require making shadow versions of themselves. And on top of the dozens of mooks I'd need to make from scratch for the new nations.

But at least I know the overall process is fairly simple.

Robotron wrote:Flags:Like with commanders several sizes for each flag must be provided for different display purposes as well as unit roundels. Take a look into data/graphics/flags to get a glimpse of how many (quite a lot) are required for every new nation.

Indeed, and I can imagine it. In fact, I think I have just a couple ideas...

Robotron wrote:Units:Modding units is even easier than commanders IF you are willing to use what is provided. Creating new kinds of unit types will require you to create unit graphics from scratch which is a quite a chore if you are not skilled at pixeling. The corresponding file is units.lua.

Interesting, and I can imagine. Well, I imagine I suck at pixelling, but I figure the vast majority of units would fit for vanilla.

Robotron wrote:Techs:Modding techs is comparable to units: new stuff needs new graphic first, modding the stats is no problem at all. The corresponding file is technology.lua.

Question: do I have to replace a new tech with an old one's place? Or can I just stack new ones onto it? Given the scenario being post-WWI, I imagine most of the powers have at least climbed the vanilla tech tree to some degree, and in the case of Western Allies like Britain, France, Italy, and perhaps even Belgium and Greece have either climbed it all the way or come very close.

Though that said, I imagine some new thing to factor in the propaganda and spy wars (as well as financing from occupied territories or the former Central Powers), and maybe something to recruit proxy or volunteer units (like the Spartakists, Freikorps, or other militias) would help. As well as maybe some new techs on the whole to reflect military advances after 1919.

Robotron wrote:Nations:This is a diligent but routine piece of work for you have to make sure to edit half a dozen scripts for every new nation.

So it's drudgery, but routine drudgery. Got it.

Robotron wrote:Events:Standard events require a 414x348 picture in .png24 format. And are reasonable easy to mod if you just want to have some picture displayed for flavour reasons (like the 1914 Christmas Truce event). If you want to include events with several possible outcomes or trigger events at variable dates things get more techy.

I can imagine. Still, that will be a pita..

Robotron wrote:Learning LUA scripting:The web is full of beginner-level instructions concerning this and if you have at least a rough understanding of basic stuff like dealing with variables, arrays and logical operators you should be able to come up with some results.

Thanks for the information. I can't imagine it will end well for me, especially since I don't have the game (so I figure I'll hold off before even making the first disastrous attempts). But well, who wants to live forever?

@TripleCP Thank you kindly for your thoughts, and I''m glad you find the alliance handling more probable.

TripleCP wrote:Interesting ideas. There was a mod announced a while back that was based on the historical Russian Civil War, but it apparently was abandoned. That would have been tricky given the hard-coded alliances, and Bolsheviks versus the world would have been closest to the mark

Indeed,and that's what I figured. Entente Allies (including most of the WWI members sans Russia, plus most of the new independents like Finland and whoever gets dragged in) versus the Bolsheviks (of various nations) and assorted allies/cobelligerents (like Kemal's Turkish nationalists, who were fighting the Western Allies during the crucial months of 1920 and so on). It may be a bit of a rough fit, but it strikes me as it.

While I agree they were far less of an existential threat to each other (and in several cases- like between the Entente and the Whites or Cossacks) conflict was all but nonexistent, I can't agree with this on the whole.

Most relevantly to this mod, the newly independent nationalists in continental Eastern Europe (primarily the Baltics and Poland) and their Allies fought not just the Bolsheviks, but also the Reich's wayward troops. Not only did Wielkopolska saw a full scale Polish uprising in the dying weeks of the war (though that could be handwaved as taking place before the start of the scenarios proper), but the two sides clashed quite bitterly in a series of on and off conflicts in Silesia.

And while the Baltic Freikorps were at first sponsored (slash tolerated) by the Allies as well as their own government after it became clear they were trying to seize power over the former territories outright bloodshed broke out with the nationalists and their allied supporters. While the vast vast vast majority of the fighting was done by Latvian, Estonian, and Lithuanian infantry, the Western Allied fleets provided both naval transport and artillery support (which I understand was quite the massive factor on the Baltic front, both against the Bolsheviks and the Germans).

I got much of my specific knowledge about those conflicts from here, as well as looking over what scant pickings are available in English elsewhere and somewhat less scant pickings from some Google autotranslate.

And then there are things like the Ukrainian cauldron. Out West Ukrainians fought Poles and Romanians in what is often called the "Last Civilized Conflict" and in the cauldron proper there was the long and bloody three way between the nationalists, the Whites, and the Reds (including some shifting alliances, like when Ukrainian nationalists joined forces with the Reds to overwhelm the government troops in Kyiv). While I agree that the Reds were a more pressing problem to both the white Russians and Ukrainian Nationalists than each other, my understanding is that there was still some truly massive clashes.

I don't think most of these conflicts will be able to be done justice in actual combat given the hard coding and overlying conflict of Reds vs. Rest, and I guess in the largely somewhat better than historical situation the Reds have... I imagine the other sides have more incentive to put the knives away in the face of utter annihilation. (Of course, they faced that historically and didn't quite, so...). At most I imagine it would work by events.

TripleCP wrote:In my view, the most plausible scenario for Soviet Russia to be in a position to export revolution would have been if Germany had not demanded so much territory in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.

A good point. However, I'm less bothered by it for a couple points. Because the Bolsheviks did make an effort (and often successful ones) to export the revolution ITTL, even given the massive issues (and in many cases they were massive, like Red Army organization). After all, there's a reason why they still held the majority of the Tsar's former empire when the overt warfare stopped. And what I find more intriguing is that they came *perilously close* to having that much more success.

Warsaw may not have been this all important turning point where a Polish/Entente defeat would result in a Communist world for ever or ever, but it would have pretty solidly spelled the end of the Second Polish Republic in any war worthy state, and would have spilled Tukhachevsky's troops into Germany with effects we can only begin to imagine. Historically Germany's communists were beaten by an uneasy alliance between the Imperial military and the new Republic and were unable to get any traction elsewhere, but I imagine that is going to be a lot easier if they have the RKKA around to more or less elevate them on their bayonets to power.

Especially when we factor in things like the rather staggering sizes things like the Ruhr Red Army achieved even in isolation.

Certainly, not having the 1917 and early 1918 offensives on the East or as demanding a Brest-Litovsk would have helped empower Lenin and the others, given them more room to build, and saved them a LOT Of headaches. But I don't think they really need it to be a continental threat, just a vastly more potent one.

(Though it might be an interesting alt starting scenario, for a stronger Red beginning...).

TripleCP wrote:Naturally, both the German General Staff and the Bolsheviks believe that the peace is temporary and that the other is destined to collapse. The Bolshevik Red Guards had seized power in Kiev and much of the Ukraine in the winter of 1917-1918 and were only expelled by the arrival of the Germans. This in turn facilitated the Cossacks being able to hold or retake the Don River basin, which is where the principal "White" force, the Russian Volunteer Army, was able to rally. The civil war in south Russia might have been more or less over before it began without German intervention.

I'm less certain, if only because I think that those events were less closely related than that (though both clearly benefited from the weakening the Reds suffered at the hands of the CP advance). Especially since the Germans mostly propped up the Ukrainian nationalists/non-Bolsheviks, while the Don Basic rising was White Russian at heart. And from my understanding it had already begun to some degree due to clashes between Red and Cossack paramilitaries and Drozdovsky's marching his unit to support them. The Germans not taking Kyiv would likely kneecap the reds by taking Kyiv it might have spelled the end for the Ukrainian nationalists, or at least the end of them in a recognizable, organized form prior to some kind of resurgance, but I don't think it would have put a stop to the Don Host's rising or the attempts by the nascent White Volunteers to form.

Now, I think it is quite likely that with a Bolshevik Kyiv those forces just get pulverized by wave after wave of Red reinforcements. Especially since the Cossacks and other Whites would be facing one united enemy all along their border rather than one major enemy, one sponsor in the CP, and one minor enemy like the Ukrainian nationalists on their West Flank. And because being ground down is kind of what happened anyway. is kind of what happened historically in the end), but it wouldn't be something Lenin could do without a fight at all.

TripleCP wrote:The same is true for the Baltics. The Red Army, the Latvian Riflemen, and local Red Guards easily took control of the region as the German Army withdrew at the end of 1918,

In Latvia and Lithuania that's certainly true, but from my understanding they never really came close to conquering Northern Estonia, between Yudenich, th somewhat better organized and earlier formed Estonian troops, and the protection of having a sea with lots of Allied vessels with big guns to their back. IIRC, that meant that the Reds petered out far earlier than they did elsewhere in the Baltic in 1919 without the German commitment being as important, and the Estonians started counterattacking while being buoyed by the Allied naval forces and volunteers from Scandinavia and Latvia.

TripleCP wrote:but the Entente actually compelled the Germans to stop the demobilization of the Eastern Front armies in order to prevent the spread of Bolshevism.

Indeed, and it was actually a term in the ceasefire. Though I would argue it wasn't a particularly hard sell to make, given how the Reds (true to form) stated they intended to carry the flame of revolution to East Prussia and Germany proper, and it seems like more and more the Germans just stopped retreating and started trying to dig in to stop that.

TripleCP wrote:Some of those German soldiers later opted to stay on and fight as Freikorps in alliance with various White and nationalist forces (incidentally this is where much of the Nazi ideology about driving out the Bolshevik subhumans and colonizing the East had its origins).

Indeed, though I do think they had their precedent, after all half the reason for clawing out so much turf in Brest-Litovsk was an attempt to gain this kind of self sufficient greater German Empire/Hegemony, including colonial "Living Space", as far back as the September Program's early drafts.

TripleCP wrote:If the Germans transfer even more forces to the West than they did historically, then the Entente might have been harder pressed than they were in 1918 and German morale may not have collapsed so suddenly.

Agreed.

TripleCP wrote:If Bolshevik power had seemed more secure in 1918, the Entente likely would not have gone through with its far-fetched attempts to restore a pro-war regime and would instead have put more effort into enticing Lenin's government to re-enter the war (this was actually considered at the time, as well).

If anything, I think it might lead them to go Further with trying to get a hawkish, non-Bolshevik government in power. In part because of simple desperation. Especially when coupled with the next point.

TripleCP wrote:Under these conditions, the Entente evacuates the Czech Legion for service in France rather than using it to secure a foothold in Siberia and never occupies Vladivostok or Arkhangelsk.

This I don't see happening at all, even given the alternative timeline.

Relations between the Legionnaires and the Reds got off to a bad start and after the temporary cooperation at Bakmach only got worse. From the sources I've read, while Lenin and co gave their normal consent to the Legion evacuating from Vladivostok, the local Soviets basically treated the Legion as this moving convenience store that they could hold up for munitions and rolling stock in order to give them permission to let them pass to the next Soviet (which would then do the same.... and so on). Things got incredibly prickly in early 1918, and when one of the local Soviets arrested some Legionnaires in May it all blew up in gunfire. Which only led Trotsky to order the Legion's destruction and the arrest of its' members.

Considering this is what happened in history, I don't see how having the Bolsheviks being even stronger would make relations between them and the Legion more cordial, or assuage the tensions. And without the shared experience of Bakmach I think it is possible fighting might break out even sooner.

And once fighting begins, the Allies suddenly have to do with a unit of the Czechoslovak Army in France- one of their forces- being engaged in conflict with the Reds. And I think that would set off the powder keg even if nothing else had.

I just view the Legion-Red issue as this ticking time bomb that played out mostly off the vanilla map, but which was both almost certain to go off and which both sides' top leadership likely had limited ability to shape.

Though on that note, since I can't really think of anywhere else to mention it but I do think it is worth putting down so I don't forget...

The sources I've read indicates that one of the things the Legion did was intercept boatloads of former CP prisoners of war that the Tsar's armies had picked up over the course of the conflict and sent to Siberia or elsewhere. Since there was only really one main rail running across Siberia, the German and Austro-Hungarian troops would be coming Westward down the lines while the Czechoslovaks and their armored trains would be going East, and when they med the Legion would all but inevitably stop them and force them to go back East.

From what I understand this was one of the major sticking points between the Legion and the Bolsheviks (though less so than the equipment taxing and generally delaying the Legion's exodus to Vladivostok). But it could be quite important.

One of the sources I looked over- Gustav Becvar, former Legionnaire and author of "The Lost Legion- mentioned that large swaths of these (former?) CP troops were Bolshevized and a few even joined the fighting against him. It's certainly possible he conflated and exaggerated that (especially given how this deals with a period where the Legion was running into serious conflicts with the Reds) as well as their number (for the sake of aggrandizement or looking back on a more glorious past for his unit), but these guys clearly would have been within range of the Party's agitators and propagandists. And it is probably safe to say that Lenin's guys would have made a fair number of converts among them.

And even if they didn't, they could still have a significant effect. Kun;'s Hungarian Soviet Army was at least as motivated by ethnonationalism as it was by Communism, so thousands of Hungarian prisoners with military training (even those who haven't signed up for the Workers' Revolution) could be a very potent and natural additive to that army. And might even lead to a very different Red Hungary/Coalition matchup in 1919.

Best I can figure, it might depend on some possible event firing in which the Legion and the Reds come to blows, one in which the Reds succeed in breaking the Legion and the other (historically) where the Legion survives. with the latter seeing the Siberian railway (and thus Siberia) falling to the Whites more heavily and the manpower tap coming from the Prisoner camps out there being shut off, while the former gives the Reds dominance of Siberia up to well East of the map and allows them to possibly get boosted by CP prisoners that are sufficiently useful to the Communist cause (either in Russia proper or in Hungary).

In any case, it can't be of much benefit to Petrograd-West relations.

TripleCP wrote:Perhaps London and Paris would have offered to forgive tsarist-era debts and to recognize the Soviet republic's right to claim all previous territory of the Russian Empire if they re-entered the war, giving the Bolsheviks an additional pretext (even if they wait until after the armistice, which they were never a party to, to initiate hostilities).

Even if the Allies did this, and even if Lenin and co were willing to make such a highly unpopular policy U Turn (even if only in private, insincerely), I still think the budding conflicts between the Allied troops and personnel in Russia and the Bolsheviks would scuttle this. In part because the desire the Soviets had for the Allied war stocks in places like Arkanglsk and for what the Czechoslovak Legion had would run headfirst into Allied commitments to protect their own and their stuff. And that's before I talk about such a public betrayal of "Peace, Land, Bread" to reenter the war being a PR and civil order nightmare.

In terms of plausible scenarios, I figure at most Lenin might use the deals to get some nice financial and military deals under the table (and maybe transfer of some of the war material at places in Northern Russia to his command) before the combination of conflicts with groups like the Czechoslovaks plus unwillingness to do a 180 leads him to betraying it.

And on a simple coding note, trying to mod a Bolshevik entry into the war would be a nightmare, since rather than the two hard coded alliances with one having its' identity changed this would make three necessary (the Entente Allies, the CP, and the Bolsheviks).

An "Entente Soviets" AH strikes me as more a separate mod, or maybe some change in vanilla for a Russian re-entry into the war via event or some specific triggers.

TripleCP wrote:There's a few other wild cards that could be thrown in there, too. Many of the future White generals had actually been arrested by the Provisional Government as a result of the attempted Kornilov coup in September 1917, but were freed by sympathetic officers to prevent them from falling into Bolshevik hands. If they stay imprisoned or are killed, there would be even less organized resistance to the Reds.

Quite so, and a brilliant point. This could definitely be a potential event, or couple of events. Much like "Lenin Shot" is a possibility.

TripleCP wrote: The humiliating terms of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was the most significant factor in causing many of the radical socialists and anarchists who were initially allied with (or at least not actively opposed to) the Bolsheviks to turn against them, which in turn led to the assassination attempt on Lenin, the intensification of Red Terror, etc.

I'm not so sure, if only because a lot- and i mean a LOT- of the Social Dems, Anarchists, and radical Socialists were quite happy to hang on with the Bolsheviks well after Brest-Litovsk. The SRs, for instance- the most popular party as far as votes go in 1917- broke up into pro and anti Bolshevik factions (the "Left" and "Right" SRs, respectively), and didn't do that until well after Brest-Litovsk. While it took even longer for the Politburo to basically neutralize both by fighting the "Rights" to destruction and reducing the "Lefts" into this quisling puppet party that could be easily annexed.

While Makhno and his troops remained allied with the Bolsheviks for much of the Civil War and even reforged the alliance after the Bolsheviks backstabbed him (unsuccessfully).

Certainly, there were a lot of people made very angry by Best-Litovsk, and I do think there was a steady drip drip drip of people affiliated with the Bolsheviks who either became disenchanted with them and defected, or basically became Bolshevik and assimilated. But I don't think B-L was such a watershed in changing the Anarchist or Socialist orientation towards the Bolsheviks.

TripleCP wrote: Likewise, if the Russian Civil War had ended sooner the Bolsheviks would not have had to resort to the policies of "war communism" which alienated many of their initial supporters and provoked a peasant revolt (getting rid of the various "Green" and "Black" movements which would be near impossible to simulate with this engine).

Agreed. I never thought of simulating the Green or Black movements (except maybe those most closely affiliated to one side of the Civil war or the Other, who could be given), except maybe as events hitting both sides by hurting PP production and the like.

TripleCP wrote:Finally, General Brusilov eventually offered his service to the Bolsheviks in May 1920 and persuaded many Russian officers to put aside their political feelings and unite around the new government for the sake of national unity. He made his decision largely as a result of the Polish advances in the Ukraine and his beliefs that the White movement was too reliant on foreign assistance and their goals of restoring the propertied classes was too violently opposed by the majority of the population. Under different circumstances, he might have made this choice in 1918 instead.

Indeed, and that is one event I had heard of and was considering. Especially since my understanding is that Brusilov is represented in game, making it an easy fix to designate him as a CP and give the Reds a possible trigger for him. Ditto lots of other former Tsarist officers who split between the Whites and Reds.

TripleCP wrote:Tl;dr, I think the only way this scenario is plausible is if Soviet Russia was in much better shape (and the rest of Europe was in worse shape) than was historically the case.

I can appreciate the thoughts, especially given such a thorough and learned consideration. But again, I have to personally disagree, in part because I think it underestimates the power of the mid/late Civil War Bolsheviks and how closely they had come to doing it in OTL.

I don't think they are ever going to defeat the fully mobilized Western Allies or Central Powers of 1918 in a full scale war. But the beauty of it (and what Lenin's theory was) is that they didn't Need to. One would defeat the other and war exhaustion, public demand for peace/demobilization, and the supposedly inevitable Proletarian Revolution would take care of what was left. Especially since I imagine this will feature less unit density than vanilla but a heavier emphasis on politics and events (like seizing cities triggering revolutions and so forth).

TripleCP wrote: Having the Germans move even more of their forces to the Western Front in 1918 accomplishes this, as it also makes it less likely for the Entente to divert any forces for intervention in Russia.

Agreed with the latter, not so sure on the former.

TripleCP wrote: The Russian Civil War would be far more brief and less destructive (which also means that the appeal of communism in Europe would not have been as damaged by the back and forth atrocities of that conflict).

Brief and less destructive certainly helps Lenin (at least assumingthere aren't revolts from below, which I think are likely), but the combination of generally shoddy news coverage in the East (a looot of times there were significant delays and blind spots in the reporting of events in Russia, and more than a few there were pro-Bolshevik) coupled with some pre existing support meant that the appeal wasn't that damaged. There was pretty broad acceptance if not support of the Bolsheviks among the Far Left pretty much everywhere, even the mainstream left was generally antagonistic to a policy that was too anti-Bolshevik or pro-White, and lots of national groups (ironically including Germans and Czechoslovaks) basically launched strikes against the transport of war material Eastwards out of nationalist antipathy towards some of the anti-Red forces (like both nations' conflict with Poland) as well as any support for the Reds.

On top of that there was a lot of hesitation- especially by the US- on intervening against the Bolsheviks . And all of this put together created a real boggy mess that limited support to the anti-Bolshevik factions in the East coming from the West.

So there are some pretty craggy national unity, heavy focus out West on demobbing, the possibility of strikes hammering the logistics line (or god forbid, outright revolts), and the like all adding up to a major problem.

In history I don't think these problems were overwhelming- and certainly not enough to give the Bolsheviks an even playing field in a straight up fight against a fully mobilized WA- but I do think they were crippling, and in a more limited conflict where the emphasis is on trying to get the Eastern Euros to carry the main burden while the West tries to support them and balance dissent Ithink it would help.

TripleCP wrote:This also helps solve the problem of trying to add new countries, as the Reds were able to brush aside the weak local nationalist movements in Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia, etc. until the German Army drove them out.

Doesn't work for- at minimum- Poland or Estonia. Two of the most important new nations for this picture-, since again it seems like the Poles benefitted from their own underground traditions, the military experience of fighting on both sides of the war, and a massive nationalist population with a significant industrial base while the Estonians were protected by the guns of the WA navies, Yudenich's troops, and their own recruiting. So those would have to be addressed even if we go for this scenario.

While whether or not it works in Finland (by the time the German Baltic Division landed in April Mannerhiem's Finnish Whites were winding down the ghastly and hugely decisive Battle of Tampere) is kind of academic. Both sides were already mobilized and well defined by the start of 1918, and not determinant on Brest-Litovsk or a resumption of hostilities due to Trotsky walking out, and so would have to be accounted for even if the odds are significantly more pro-Bolshevik in such a situation.

It is an interesting idea for alt history and worth considering, but I do think the main thrust should be considering scenarios that occurred from a more or less historical base (even if that is "Bolsheviks break through Warsaw in 1920").

But in any case, thanks for taking the time to read and reply. I'm glad you find it interesting.

@Turtler: Truth be told: all those musings won't get you one iota closer to that mod you are dreaming of. You remind me of someone who is pondering upon what colour to paint the living room of your new house while not even having started to build the walls. Get your act together and come up with something substantial or this is just castles in Spain.

You could start with some lists for example just to have a vague outline of what would have to be included.

- list of participating factions- list of new units. list of new techs- list of new events (when will they trigger? what should happen?)- list of commanders (at least 2-3 per major faction)

especially since I don't have the game

It might also be advantageous to actually own and having played the game at least a few times before starting such a big project to see if the game's look&feel actually appeals to you since most of it would be carried over to that mod you are envisioning. Owning the vanilla game would also give you the opportunity to do some basic modding and I'll help you with that.

"Potzblitz! Donnerwetter!" (Emperor Wilhelm II)

Commander the Great War on steroids: POTZBLITZ mod!http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=218&t=77884&p=662610#p662610

Robotron wrote:@Turtler: Truth be told: all those musings won't get you one iota closer to that mod you are dreaming of.

I am exceptionally well aware, believe me.

I included the "Random idea" in the middle of this thread title, and I did it for a reason. I was pitching it to see if it was *impossible* under the current engine more than if it was.Because if it is impossible, well there is nothing to be done, whereas if it isn't it could conceivably be put together at some point. Even if that point involves it coming well indeed.

Robotron wrote:You remind me of someone who is pondering upon what colour to paint the living room of your new house while not even having started to build the walls. Get your act together and come up with something substantial or this is just castles in Spain.

My act is together, it just isn't focused primarily on this endeavor. At least not yet, due to more pressing real life issues. For reasons you can imagine.

Robotron wrote:You could start with some lists for example just to have a vague outline of what would have to be included.

Indeed, and I have already started coming together with it. Especially the "List of Participating Factions", and a couple of events that will likely be a part of it. Ditto commanders. I can put them (and the possible scenario ideas) next in the point.

Robotron wrote:It might also be advantageous to actually own and having played the game at least a few times before starting such a big project

No, really? You don't say!

It's not like I didn't mention this little caveat in the very first paragraph of the thread's first post.

Oh, actually, I did.

Turtler wrote:Hello everyone. To say the least, I'm not particularly well experienced or versed in this game at all (in fact, I do not even have it at all, though I intend to get it when sales roll around). However, I am an old Slitherine and Matrix hand as well as a history nerd. I've gotten plenty of experience from the Panzer Corps game that this engine is based on. And this concept is one idea that came to mind which it seemed that Commander:TGW would be superbly placed to model. . One of History's greatest unwritten conflicts, and perhaps a great "What If" in the modern world. So I figured I would push this out here to both clear a brain fart, and to do a rough "probability check" for those of it

So it isn't like I didn't make the massive limitations I have clear at the start. You are right, do not get me wrong. But you don't seem to understand the initial reasons why I put this forth.

First and foremost being to see "Can this actually be done without bringing the game to complete implosion?" And it seems like the answer is- as long as it is Bolsheviks and assorted vs. Allies- it won't. So that solves the practicality check.

And secondly as an interest check for the general concept, which can then be fleshed out (or not), especially while I still do not have the game.

Yes, this does amount to drawing castles on paper at present, and yes it is not much. And in that sense you are right. However, I tried to make it very clear what I could and could not do right now in the very first paragraph.

And like you said, you don't have castles built without a plan. This is sort of trying to iron that plan down.

Anyway, with that said, I did write a fair bit and come up with a list of factions and scenarios, pending the rest. I'll try and post them after dinner.